There's recently been quite a lot of discussion on Necron lists based on the new Codex, and so I feel I should set out some guidelines for any new style lists that want to be considered more than just fan lists.

My intention is to come up with a set of special rules and unit stats that are as consistent as possible between the new and old lists. Where units have changed only slightly we will be sticking with the old stats, at least for now, though I can be convinced to change the old list to more match the recent style, if it proves viable.

I believe that as much as possible units that are effectively the same between the lists should have the same stats, so the goal is to remove (or at least reduce as much as possible) the conflicts in stats and rules for shared units, much like Dave and I recently did for the old and new style Tyranids. Compromise on both sides will of course be necessary.

It will be allowable for different lists to have army-specific rules included or removed, but unit stats and special rules will need to remain consistent between lists.



Ok, now let's take a look at the existing epic special rules and how they stack up:

Necron - This is adequate to represent Reanimation Protocols, and I'm not adverse to changing the name if that's what people want.

Portals - I believe this rule adequately represents the Monolith's Eternity Gate and the Dolmen Gate. Remember, the old 40k Monolith Portal rules didn't really match the epic rules either, and they're kind of a general catagory of portal rules rather than specifically matching each type. The Night Scythe will probably need a modified version of the rule, or a special note/rule of its own. I'll get onto that when I discuss units.

Tomb Complex - This is really specific to the old style list as doesn't need to be used by any new lists. Something very similar would work for the Dolmen Gate though.

Living Metal - Hmmm. This took quite a drop in the new codex, and now effectively counts as nothing more than Reinforced Armour at epic scale. This will definitely cause issues in list consistency unless we find a clever solution. I'd be very interested if anyone has any ideas for a viable way of keeping consistency here; I'm open to suggestions for a compromise rule.

Implacable Advance - A core race rule, it stays.

Phase Out - This is an interesting one. There aren't many references to phasing out in the new fluff, but from what I can gather it now works more like the epic rules than the old 40k rules, i.e. much more localised with squads returning to base to heal up rather than entire armies vanishing. Either way, this is an army-wide rule, but it's optional whether new lists want to use it or not.

Necron Reserves - No brainer, it stays.

Garrisons - Army list specific, totally optional whether new lists use it or not.




So effectively, new-style lists must have:

Necron/Reanimation Protocols
Portals
(Living Metal?)
Implacable Advance
Necron Reserves

Other rules are optional, and new lists may of course add new army-wide rules too.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

After some thought it seems resonable to me

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

With regards to unit stats and special rules, I'm going to first focus on the units shared by the new and old codices.

Adding units with weapons other than the old default weapon options to a list is fine, as long as they have a new name and retain all other stats (except possibly CC and FF which may change depending on weapons).

Necron Warriors - The only change is a switch from 3+ to 4+ armour at 40k, but I'd prefer to retain 4+ armour at epic level rather than dropping to 5+.

Immortals - New style has T4 instead of T5. Minor change IMHO, and not worth changing over. Minor weapon change for the Gauss Blaster in that it's now Rapid Fire rather than Assault 2. Again, not worth changing over.

Necron Lord - Staff of light is no longer a deadly CC weapon, but I think the current stats are still fine as the MW attack can equally represent one of the other nasty CC weapons at his disposal. Stat changes are irrelevant since he's a character. A Royal Court unit may be worth considering seperately.

Flayed Ones - Lost some Initiative but gained an attack, overall about the same CC wise. Same armour issue as Warriors.

Wraiths - Yes, I know they're now called Canoptek Wraiths, but they're still the same thing. Unless there are some particularly strong arguments, I don't see the need for stat changes.

(Heavy) Destroyers - No real change here; swapped from skimmer to jump infantry and got preferred enemy. I don't see a need for stat changes.

Tomb/Canoptek Spyders - Again, little new here that would warrant a change.

Monolith - Ok, let's leave Living Metal aside for now. Other than that, the main changes are the Flux arc and the Portal of Exile. The flux arc isn't really an issue; the new version is still well represented by a couple of extra FF attacks. The Portal of Exile is another matter, and is probably most easily represented by giving the monolith a higher CC value. I'm happy to do that.


-------------------------------

Note that I am open to being convinced to make stat changes to any of the above units, as long as the agreed upon stats are an acceptable compromise for both lists.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

With regards to the units only found in the new list, for now I'm not going to lay down the law. For now it's up to list developers to come up with stats they like and try to compromise between themselves. I'll step in where necessary if agreement cannot be reached, or if I really dislike the solutions you guys come up with.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Necron Warriors: 3+ Save? Who came up with this? Perhabs without Ressurection Protocols/Necron. 4+ is fine as is.

Immortals: No issue

Necron Lord: Difficult. I rather would rename him. Also i see Lords (and Destructor Lords) only as repair aides (due to Leader = Ressurection Orb), Overlords as Commander and the Phaeron as Supreme Commander.

Flayed Ones: No issue.

Canoptek Wraith: For me they ARE a new unit. Also i see everything with "Canoptek" as TRUE Artificial Intelligences and thus have Fearless.

(Heavy) Destroyer: Hmmm. Ok forcing FF could be seen as their enhanced CC abilities.

Canoptek Spyder: Same issue. They don`t enhance repair anymore. That's what Ghost Arks now are for (and Necron Lords in my Sautekh list).

Monolith: No issue.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

I was referring to the 40k save changing from 3+ to 4+, which could justify a change from 4+ to 5+ in epic. Apologies for not being clearer.



I'd rather they remain the same, at least for now, or come up with a compromise change to both lists. I'm really not in favour of renaming.



To me they're the same unit, just more is now known about them. They're represented by the same models, and there are no non-canoptek versions of the units in the 40k lists, so they are the same thing. I'm willing to consider adding fearless to the older list wraiths.



They can repair vehicles and produce scarabs, so they still have repair functions that make leader viable. The fluff text also says:

"Canoptek Spyders whose primary duties are oversight, rather than direct action, craft slaved hosts of Canoptek Scarabs and nanoscarabs within their abdomens, which are unleashed to effect repairs on nearby Necrons or to consume enemy weapons and armour."

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Necron Lord: With the Raiders stats the Necron Lords mimics a Sautekh Necron Overlord minus Commander.

Canoptek Wraith: In comparison to the raiders Wraith in the Sautekh list Canoptek Wraiths lost the EA, gained Walker, Fearless and Lance on their basic CC attack.
And AFAIK Wraith where often complained as an inferior choice even as their own formation? With thenew stats they might be more favourable.

Canoptek Spyder: This might be refered to in the fluff, but not in the rules anymore. Repairing abilities for vehicles are generally left out in Epic (see Techmarine, etc). Canoptek Spyders manufacture new Canoptek Scarabs and hamper psychic powers and repair vehicles. The last two things are even optional.
Speakingof manufacturing Canoptek Scarabs: I would like to see them as actual units as a certain sea mammal has made models for them. Something like LightVehicle Speed 20cm Save4+ CC5+ FF- With Lance on their basic CC-attack. Not Fearless but Disposable.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

I really am not convinced you need to change anything at all. I've never been a huge fan of keeping up with the GW Joneses and with the list functioning as well as it does, I can't imagine any of these things helping make the list more fun, more playable, or more balanced.

The current list has some very small point issues with the Destroyers, and I can't even think of anything else.

The Living Metal, based on your OP, seems to be the big changer from old to new. Any change to that is going to modify every War Engine and your Monoliths, essentially sending the Necrons back to the drawing board. For what? Why expend all that effort to match the stats on a game that most Epic players barely tolerate.

IMO take the new ideas from the new codex that are the most appealing, apply them to the new variant lists, and compensate as necessary. You lose nothing in the process.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

BL: We're going in the direction of using the existing unit stats for now. If you want the list to be considered more than a fanlist then that's what you need to do.

Mosc: The only changes I'm suggesting so far are an increase in monolith CC (which is of negligible importance on a FF heavy skimmer), fearless on wraiths (which isn't a terrible idea anyway since noone takes them) and potentially renaming the Necron rule, which is not a big deal.

Living Metal is another matter, and I have no intention of changing it in the current list. If that means either forcing the existing rule on the new lists or having a different Living Metal rule for the new lists, then so be it, one area of variation is not the end of the world.

I'm not going to make any unbalancing changes to the list, but if a couple of minor changes allow us to synchronise with the new style lists then it's worthwhile in order to achieve consistency.

There are already two new-style lists in progress, so there's obviously interest in developing them, so it's only responsible of me to suggest a way forward that unites the styles under a consistent banner.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

My first reaction was exactly the same as Mosc's. The list works as is and doesn't need to be changed.
However, having had Zombo define his ideas, I'm a little more open to some change.

The Monolith doesn't need a buff of any sort at all (even one that would almost never be used). It is a tough, powerful and extremely useful unit as is and doesn't need to keep up with gw's latest ideas.

The Wraith could get Fearless and that would help to make them more appealing (as would Scout but I on't know if that's warranted).

I see no need to rename the Necron rule at all. Just seems change for changes sake.

I'm VERY glad to hear this and I hope all understand that that is the way it's going to be.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Scarabs have stats in the Tomb World list:

Scarab Swarm
INF 15cm 6+ 5+ -
Swarm Attack (contact) (Assault Weapons), EA(+1)
NOTES: Expendable (Non-Scarab Swarm units), Ignore Cover, Infiltrate, Necron

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

Not really a fan of having scarabs as units, I really liked their abstraction as a better FF ability.

One other change I haven't seen mentioned yet is C'Tan. Dunno if you'd want to reduce their power (they're weaker in the new codex) but I think removing SC from them for new lists at least would make sense.

In terms of old style army rules: I think they are fine as is, and if the new lists need to change that, it would be easier to just make a new rule instead of messing up whats already been done.

In terms of new units:

wraiths: their fearless and not necron any more, and they have twice as many wounds. Those are some big changes in my opinion.

lord : new name, easy fix, its no different then there being gold silver and bronze lords

spyder : Dont take my opinion in to account cus I dont take them enough to care, but if it comes down to ease of play, just use the old stats.

warriors : 5+ for a save is what Im using for the Nihilakh list.

Monolith : hmmm I WOULD like to see the door incorporated in to some effect.... but other then how the monoliths are in the Nihilakh list I dont see any need to change beyond that.

Living metal : leave as is, makes it easier then adding shields to the list........

How ever,

I AM a fan of having scarabs as units, I think they have uses in game and in addition they are a great add on as point fillers as they are cheap and can go in most formations with out adding any negative result.

miket:

The new ctan are not the same if you read the new fluff, they are shards now. and both lists have them in there with obvious modifications.

Simply make a new C'tan Shard unit IMO.

All I've done is say which rules must be kept for any list that wants to be considered more than just a fan list.



Yes, they're big changes, and I'm willing to meet halfway by making them fearless.



For such a minor issue I'd much rather retain the existing stats rather than create a new unit for what is supposed to be the same thing.



You're going to need to change to 4+ if you want official recognition for the list.



I'm willing to consider upping the CC value to represent it, but nothing more than that.



Lists CAN have scarabs as units if you want, just try to be consistent with stats between lists.



Indeed, I am presuming new-style lists will have a new "C'tan Shard" unit.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread